If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

I hope that's purely optional? I wouldn't want Firefox to fry my GPU, on top of making my browsing slow.

Anything done in QML / QtQuick is automatically pushed through an OpenGL Scenegraph, it helps to enforce a clear cut separation between logic and GUI, both during development and during runtime. Not sure how much is automatically done through OpenGL if you take a program that uses QWidgets (traditional Qt) compiled under Qt5

You have very strange definitions of "proven fact". OpenShot's and PCMan's praise counts as exactly that - OpenShot's and PCMan's respective opinions. And they might be right, when it comes to OpenShot and PCMan specifically. That still is a long way from being a "proven fact" that Qt is better for every application in every situation.

It may not be a proven in a mathematical sense but so many projects switched from GTK to Qt (OTOH you could not name a single switch the other way around). When this many projects move only in one direction, the evidence is very clear.

With the help Samsung currently provides to the Enlightenment project, EFL may catch up to Qt in the future but not all EFL modules (esp. Elementary) are there yet. At least the possibility is there – such is the possibility to turn Clutter into a full-fledged toolkit.
GTK on the other hand needs a revolution. Even the Gnome community threw out the shell implemented in GTK and replaced it with a Clutter-based solution (=GNOME Shell), suggesting the revolution will not come.

Toolkits can die. Motif/Lesstif already died and that didn't leave the world with a horrible monopoly.

It may not be a proven in a mathematical sense but so many projects switched from GTK to Qt (OTOH you could not name a single switch the other way around). When this many projects move only in one direction, the evidence is very clear.

With the help Samsung currently provides to the Enlightenment project, EFL may catch up to Qt in the future but not all EFL modules (esp. Elementary) are there yet. At least the possibility is there – such is the possibility to turn Clutter into a full-fledged toolkit.
GTK on the other hand needs a revolution. Even the Gnome community threw out the shell implemented in GTK and replaced it with a Clutter-based solution (=GNOME Shell), suggesting the revolution will not come.

Toolkits can die. Motif/Lesstif already died and that didn't leave the world with a horrible monopoly.

Evidence? Are there more projects moving to Qt than there are staying on GTK then?

It may not be a proven in a mathematical sense but so many projects switched from GTK to Qt (OTOH you could not name a single switch the other way around). When this many projects move only in one direction, the evidence is very clear.

With the help Samsung currently provides to the Enlightenment project, EFL may catch up to Qt in the future but not all EFL modules (esp. Elementary) are there yet. At least the possibility is there – such is the possibility to turn Clutter into a full-fledged toolkit.
GTK on the other hand needs a revolution. Even the Gnome community threw out the shell implemented in GTK and replaced it with a Clutter-based solution (=GNOME Shell), suggesting the revolution will not come.

Toolkits can die. Motif/Lesstif already died and that didn't leave the world with a horrible monopoly.

Just because Gnome is not using GTK for the shell does not mean GTK is dying. Fact is there are a number of *new* GNOME applications being written. And new widgets are being developed. Not the sign of a dying toolkit if you ask me.

People have been screaming about the death of GNOME for about three years now (probably longer), and development is still going strong, and I see more people using it now than a few years ago.

Just because Gnome is not using GTK for the shell does not mean GTK is dying. Fact is there are a number of *new* GNOME applications being written. And new widgets are being developed. Not the sign of a dying toolkit if you ask me.

As far as I can see, they usually use Clutter. GTK has been degraded to a mere provider of Open/Save windows and such. Older Gnome applications don't use Clutter as extensively but even these are migrating towards Clutter in many cases.

Originally Posted by kigurai

People have been screaming about the death of GNOME for about three years now (probably longer)

What does Gnome have to do with this? Are you as confused as Dee how thinks that Qt and KDE are the same thing?
Gnome is fine, just GTK is not. That's why Gnome is increasingly using Clutter.

As far as I can see, they usually use Clutter. GTK has been degraded to a mere provider of Open/Save windows and such. Older Gnome applications don't use Clutter as extensively but even these are migrating towards Clutter in many cases.

Not true at all. Clutter and Gtk have different use-cases.

What does Gnome have to do with this? Are you as confused as Dee how thinks that Qt and KDE are the same thing?
Gnome is fine, just GTK is not. That's why Gnome is increasingly using Clutter.

It was an example of "X is dying" which has not happened. I thought it was relevant.
I am quite aware that Qt and KDE is not the same thing. I use quite a few of Qt-but-not-KDE applications on a day-to-day basis.

This toolkit war is pretty pointless. But kudos for the stamina to keep it going for ten pages

As far as I can see, they usually use Clutter. GTK has been degraded to a mere provider of Open/Save windows and such. Older Gnome applications don't use Clutter as extensively but even these are migrating towards Clutter in many cases.
[…]
Gnome is fine, just GTK is not. That's why Gnome is increasingly using Clutter.

Which applications do you mean? With GNOME Documents, for example, it's not the case:

all: don't use Clutter and ClutterGTK
Now GTK+ and libgd have everything we used to need Clutter and ClutterGTK for, so port Documents to be a pure GTK application. This has huge benefits for performance, accessibility and integration.from git.gnome.org

Toolkits can die. Motif/Lesstif already died and that didn't leave the world with a horrible monopoly.

Lesstif is alive on the poor computers where I install xpdf (it's okay for a LXDE desktop on some Pentium 3 700 level PC with 256 to 512MB ram)

Else, I use xcalc on a regular basis, always quickly accessible (I launch two of them if I need to quickly compare some numbers). I've found it more enjoyable than mate-calc and galculator. I believe that doesn't use a toolkit at all.
Shouldn't that be the new way, with the Wayland paradigm "everything is a dumb pixel buffer"? Death to all toolkits, lol.